143: Abstract withdrawn
Bibliographic record
Abstract
following questionnaires: the EPIC-50, the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), the Sexual Health Inventory for men (SHIM), and the EORTC QLQ PR25.Analyses were conducted using the SAS 9.3 software (2012, SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA) and the alpha level was set at 5%.Results: The internal consistency of the EPIC was demonstrated by significant item-total correlations and elevated Cronbach's alpha for each subscale (urinary: r = .25-.80; α = .85;intestinal: r = .27-.73; α = .84;sexual: r = .48-.80; α = .92;hormonal: r = .21-.71; α = .80).Strong and significant correlations were found between EPIC-urinary subscale and IPSS total score (r =-.71, p < .01)and between EPIC-sexual subscale and SHIM total score (r = .79,p < .01),thus supporting the convergent validity of the EPIC.The test-retest reliability was excellent with strong and significant correlations obtained between the two administrations (urinary: r = .90;intestinal: r = .84;sexual: r = .88;hormonal: r = .79)and the absence of significant differences between T1 and T2 mean scores.Finally, a significant deterioration was found on all EPIC subscales from pre-to posttreatment thus indicating that the tool is sensitive to clinical change.Conclusions: Our French Canadian version of the EPIC-50 appears to provide a reliable and valid assessment of quality of life in prostate cancer patients.Future analyses will investigate its factorial structure and the psychometric properties of the abbreviated version.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.313 | 0.197 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".